Trump to gut ACA via executive order

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama wanted to do single payer but chose the Heritage Foundation plan (the same thing Romney did in Mass); so if it didn't work, you can point back to the GOP and Heritage Foundation.

Demi and Progressives have generally wanted single payer since the early 1970's.

Good luck with that. Country of 320 million and it won't scale, especially when half the country doesn't want to pay for anything.


I don't really care what democrats want. They constantly "want. They're like kids for life". They perpetually broke and constantly ask "Can we have....."

Yup. Remember that woman who asked Obama, during his campaign run, if it was true he was going to pay off her mortgage? (Or, more precisely, the taxpayers would?) Democrats run their entire campaigns on, "if you vote for me, I will give you more free stuff." The latest rendition was free college. Get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Insurers in 14 states assumed CSRs would continue, so they're screwed—expect insurers to exit. This includes:

Alaska, Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas and Vermont.

Off the top of my head, Alaska, Arizona, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas are Red/Purple states.

I wonder how they will deal with an immediate collapse in their markets and how their voters feel today?

Maryland and New Jersey can likely do something to bridge the gap, though voters in Garrett, Alleghany and Washington County will definitely feel the pinch.

Except the cost-sharing subsidies go to the much poorer people, and the struggling working class (say a couple of HS grads earning $30k each) will continue to get insurance premium subsidies. And THEY are the core of the "idiots in flyover country" that you elitists demean, and who largely voted for Trump. And THAT is exactly what these "barely-getting-by" had been complaining about - that poor people got all the government goodies while they were left holding the bag.

OTOH, the poor people - urban cities in the liberal states, like CA, IL, an NY - are primarily the Hillary voters who wanted to keep the goodies flowing. That would be fine and dandy if money were unlimited, but it's not, and so now they will feel the pain that Obamacare caused the middle class (who get NO subsidies at all), while leaving the working class - the Trump voters - unaffected for the most part. It's a good start in forcing the Congress to act - and that includes addressing the high cost of medical care itself.

Not true. The poorest in our society will continue to get Medicare. It's the lower middle class/working poor who are going to get stiffed by the removal of the subsidies for health insurance and go without needed medical care. Trump seems to enjoy breaking things, but has no talent for building anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

Do republicans ever take responsibility for their actions? Ever??? What does it take? Such a sleazy bunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going forward, it's TrumpCare.

If it isn't covered and you thought it was, that's on Trump.
If it is more expensive, then it's on Trump.
If you have caps, its on Trump.
If pre-existing isn't covered, it's on Trump.

yep. AGREE!

Disagree. Why would Obama design a health care plan that requires a Republican president to prop it up, lest it fall apart? If it can't stand on its own, it's fundamentally flawed, and the person who designed and pushed it is to blame.

OMG, your logic is just, wow.

Impressive rebuttal!

If I'm an architect and I design and build a fundamentally flawed house, is it fair for me to blame others when it eventually falls apart?

+1. I gave the same example, albeit on a micro-level. If my husband insists on buying a house that the inspector said has multiple and critical issues - and I was opposed - is it fair for him to turn around a few years later and blame me for not wanting for not wanting to throw good money after bad in a never-ending attempt to make it livable?

You need take it a step further. The flawed house that your husband bought was built on a brownfield site which needed to be remediated. The house was the best that could be done at the time, and now it has been willfully damaged by neglect, so in addition to not having a viable house, you still have the brownfield site to deal with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

Do republicans ever take responsibility for their actions? Ever??? What does it take? Such a sleazy bunch.

No they don't. And when Trump voters suddenly find themselves paying even more for healthcare (or find that those flimsy plans they can now buy don't cover anything substantial) they will continue to blame Obama. This should be interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

Do republicans ever take responsibility for their actions? Ever??? What does it take? Such a sleazy bunch.

Do you possess any self-awareness whatsoever?

Obama picked a bad, fundamentally flawed health care plan. The only way it can possibly continue to hobble along is if Trump decides to prop it up. And Obama is in no way to blame?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going forward, it's TrumpCare.

If it isn't covered and you thought it was, that's on Trump.
If it is more expensive, then it's on Trump.
If you have caps, its on Trump.
If pre-existing isn't covered, it's on Trump.

yep. AGREE!

Disagree. Why would Obama design a health care plan that requires a Republican president to prop it up, lest it fall apart? If it can't stand on its own, it's fundamentally flawed, and the person who designed and pushed it is to blame.

OMG, your logic is just, wow.

Impressive rebuttal!

If I'm an architect and I design and build a fundamentally flawed house, is it fair for me to blame others when it eventually falls apart?

+1. I gave the same example, albeit on a micro-level. If my husband insists on buying a house that the inspector said has multiple and critical issues - and I was opposed - is it fair for him to turn around a few years later and blame me for not wanting for not wanting to throw good money after bad in a never-ending attempt to make it livable?

You need take it a step further. The flawed house that your husband bought was built on a brownfield site which needed to be remediated. The house was the best that could be done at the time, and now it has been willfully damaged by neglect, so in addition to not having a viable house, you still have the brownfield site to deal with.

Dems are always making excuses. Never taking responsibility for their actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

Do republicans ever take responsibility for their actions? Ever??? What does it take? Such a sleazy bunch.

Do you possess any self-awareness whatsoever?

Obama picked a bad, fundamentally flawed health care plan. The only way it can possibly continue to hobble along is if Trump decides to prop it up. And Obama is in no way to blame?

I'll play. Sure, Obama has some blame. Now who else is to blame?


Or is it just Obama....according to you?

[Anonymous]

The healthcare system prior to Obama was already failing (brownfield site); he proposed the ACA because it was the GOP plan, thinking since it was the GOP plan it would be better than nothing (rickety house); the GOP failed to help fix the issues (demolition by neglect) and now Trump has taken out the dynamite to take out the house once and for all.

However, there is still a brownfield site (failing healthcare system) that needs to be dealt with.

if not the ACA, then what will the GOP propose to ensure millions of people can receive care, while making heath insurance cheaper and cover pre-existing conditions without lifetime caps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Insurers in 14 states assumed CSRs would continue, so they're screwed—expect insurers to exit. This includes:

Alaska, Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas and Vermont.

Off the top of my head, Alaska, Arizona, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas are Red/Purple states.

I wonder how they will deal with an immediate collapse in their markets and how their voters feel today?

Maryland and New Jersey can likely do something to bridge the gap, though voters in Garrett, Alleghany and Washington County will definitely feel the pinch.

Except the cost-sharing subsidies go to the much poorer people, and the struggling working class (say a couple of HS grads earning $30k each) will continue to get insurance premium subsidies. And THEY are the core of the "idiots in flyover country" that you elitists demean, and who largely voted for Trump. And THAT is exactly what these "barely-getting-by" had been complaining about - that poor people got all the government goodies while they were left holding the bag.

OTOH, the poor people - urban cities in the liberal states, like CA, IL, an NY - are primarily the Hillary voters who wanted to keep the goodies flowing. That would be fine and dandy if money were unlimited, but it's not, and so now they will feel the pain that Obamacare caused the middle class (who get NO subsidies at all), while leaving the working class - the Trump voters - unaffected for the most part. It's a good start in forcing the Congress to act - and that includes addressing the high cost of medical care itself.

Not true. The poorest in our society will continue to get Medicare. It's the lower middle class/working poor who are going to get stiffed by the removal of the subsidies for health insurance and go without needed medical care. Trump seems to enjoy breaking things, but has no talent for building anything.

Well, it all depends on what you consider lower-middle/working poor, which in DCUMland is highly skewed. The lower-middle and working class are NOT getting the premium subsidies removed. The working poor (those making $20,000 a year) WILL lose the cost-sharing subsidies, so instead of paying $5 to see the doctor, they'll have to pay $20. Will it hurt? Sure. Will it keep them from going to the doctor? Possibly. But that's what has been happening with the TRUE middle class (the $50K earner) for years now under Obamacare - only in addition to not having their insurance cover anything, they're paying a fortune in premiums for the privilege. Where was the outcry for the middle class who have had to go without needed medical care?

For example, my neighbor was bragging to me that under Ocare, her mother (an immigrant from 40 years ago who never learned English and never had a job) gets her eye treatments for FREE, thanks to Ocare. (My neighbor could well have helped her mother pay for them, but better someone else pay, right?). She did not realize that I have the same eye condition, and require the same eye treatments. They are a fortune! I cannot afford to go according to the recommended schedule, and am stretching them out. WHY should I have to pay $800/month in premiums and not be able to afford the treatments I need, after 30 years of paying federal income tax, and yet the neighbor's poor mother gets the treatments for free?

Maybe before we hand out all the free medical care to poor people, we should look to their successful adult children to help pay their medical costs. Why toss it over to a middle-class person to provide medical care for your parents when you are able to do it yourself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This isn't "his" plan. This is the best he could do working with he a-hole Rs. He should have shut them out (a la GOP process) to get it right.

NO, this was HIS plan. O B A M A C A R E.

As of yesterday it’s Trumpcare, good luck.

No, it's not. It will always be Obamacare.

Nope, he broke the china in the store, he owns it now.

The china was crumbling before Trump was even elected. (If it wasn't, he might not have won.)

Do republicans ever take responsibility for their actions? Ever??? What does it take? Such a sleazy bunch.

Do you possess any self-awareness whatsoever?

Obama picked a bad, fundamentally flawed health care plan. The only way it can possibly continue to hobble along is if Trump decides to prop it up. And Obama is in no way to blame?

I'll play. Sure, Obama has some blame. Now who else is to blame?


Or is it just Obama....according to you?

If I'm an architect who designs and builds a fundamentally flawed house, I can be mad that the home owner didn't spend more money on repairs or that the repairmen could have done a better job, but I'm the one who is primarily to blame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going forward, it's TrumpCare.

If it isn't covered and you thought it was, that's on Trump.
If it is more expensive, then it's on Trump.
If you have caps, its on Trump.
If pre-existing isn't covered, it's on Trump.

yep. AGREE!

Disagree. Why would Obama design a health care plan that requires a Republican president to prop it up, lest it fall apart? If it can't stand on its own, it's fundamentally flawed, and the person who designed and pushed it is to blame.

OMG, your logic is just, wow.

Impressive rebuttal!

If I'm an architect and I design and build a fundamentally flawed house, is it fair for me to blame others when it eventually falls apart?

+1. I gave the same example, albeit on a micro-level. If my husband insists on buying a house that the inspector said has multiple and critical issues - and I was opposed - is it fair for him to turn around a few years later and blame me for not wanting for not wanting to throw good money after bad in a never-ending attempt to make it livable?

You need take it a step further. The flawed house that your husband bought was built on a brownfield site which needed to be remediated. The house was the best that could be done at the time, and now it has been willfully damaged by neglect, so in addition to not having a viable house, you still have the brownfield site to deal with.

Dems are always making excuses. Never taking responsibility for their actions.

And by "neglect" they mean refusing to throw more money at the problem. The D's answer to everything. Funny, when I think of it, the most personally selfish people I know are D's. But they sure are generous with other people's money!

[Anonymous]

The majority of people who voted for Trump and against their own financial interest (e.g., the working poor) won't care. They may or may not understand health insurance on a mirco or macro level--but that's not the point. They think that Trump is shaking things up, and for them, that is all that matters. This is not about rational economic thinking or any sense of distributive economic justice for these voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going forward, it's TrumpCare.

If it isn't covered and you thought it was, that's on Trump.
If it is more expensive, then it's on Trump.
If you have caps, its on Trump.
If pre-existing isn't covered, it's on Trump.

yep. AGREE!

Disagree. Why would Obama design a health care plan that requires a Republican president to prop it up, lest it fall apart? If it can't stand on its own, it's fundamentally flawed, and the person who designed and pushed it is to blame.

OMG, your logic is just, wow.

Impressive rebuttal!

If I'm an architect and I design and build a fundamentally flawed house, is it fair for me to blame others when it eventually falls apart?

+1. I gave the same example, albeit on a micro-level. If my husband insists on buying a house that the inspector said has multiple and critical issues - and I was opposed - is it fair for him to turn around a few years later and blame me for not wanting for not wanting to throw good money after bad in a never-ending attempt to make it livable?

You need take it a step further. The flawed house that your husband bought was built on a brownfield site which needed to be remediated. The house was the best that could be done at the time, and now it has been willfully damaged by neglect, so in addition to not having a viable house, you still have the brownfield site to deal with.

Dems are always making excuses. Never taking responsibility for their actions.

And by "neglect" they mean refusing to throw more money at the problem. The D's answer to everything. Funny, when I think of it, the most personally selfish people I know are D's. But they sure are generous with other people's money!

You mean follow the law. Trump is refusing to follow the law.